Summary of editorials from the Hebrew press
BreuerPress
Ma’ariv analyzes Israel’s stance toward the situation in Syria and says that aside from ensuring the security of the border and of Israelis living on the Golan Heights, Israel should maintain as low a profile as possible. The author asserts: „The conflict in Syria exists on many levels: Local, regional, international and ethnic,” and adds: „Our supreme interest needs to be not getting dragged into this conflict. We have already been dragged into the conflict in Lebanon and been burned. If we are dragged into the Syrian conflict, we will be burned far worse.”
Yediot Aharonot refers to the ongoing situation in Lebanon. The author avers: „Up until a year ago, it would have been hard to imagine a scenario in which anyone – Arab or Lebanese – would have dared launch Katyushas at Hezbollah’s administrative capital in Beirut,” but adds: „As Hezbollah’s involvement in the war in Syria grows, so does the erosion of its political position and military deterrent ability inside Lebanon.” The paper believes that „The successful attack creates a precedent for all those groups that are hostile to Hezbollah in both Syria and Lebanon; the psychological barriers are falling one after the other.” The author cautions that „Lebanon is sitting on an increasingly volatile inter-ethnic powderkeg,” at a time when „The government is paralyzed,” and concludes: „The memory of the previous civil war is not encouraging the factions to return to those bloody days. In the meantime, Lebanon may expect inc reasingly broader local outbreaks of violence. What is important for Israel is the continued weakening of Hezbollah.”
Yisrael Hayom discusses the diplomatic meetings in Jordan against the backdrop of the World Economic Summit and suggests that Likud and Jewish Home ministers’ criticism of President Shimon Peres’ remarks in Jordan was entirely misplaced. The author says that not only did President Peres hold a coordination meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu before leaving for Jordan, but „The impression has been strengthening in recent years that Abu Mazen is comfortable with the continuation of the existing situation. He is striving for diplomatic achievements at the UN and to step up the boycott of Israel, but he
has no desire to reach actual negotiations.” The paper suggests that not only do
the Palestinian Authority and Israeli governments doubt the other’s political will to go beyond rhetoric and actually move forward on the peace process, but that they also sense weakness in Washington and a lessening of the US administration’s will to press for progress.
The Jerusalem Post anticipates the results of the Peri Committee’s discussions regarding compulsory military or national service of the ultra-Orthodox and Arab populations, and notes the “rise in incitement, intimidation and, sometimes, violence against those in the ultra-Orthodox and Arab populations who choose to enlist in the IDF.” The editor asserts: “The dynamic of closed, undemocratic societies, whether Arab or haredi, is such that vocal extremists, who might only represent a minority, dominate the discourse of religious and political extremism while proponents of moderation are perceived as weak,” and concludes: “if we truly want to bring about a situation in which more haredim and non-Jews enlist, we must ensure that those who do opt to serve are protected from extremists.”
Haaretz remarks that “[the West Bank] Settlers have a general in the crosshairs,” and adds: “So far the head of the IDF’s Central Command, Maj. Gen. Nitzan Alon, has succeeded in his mission to preserve security while using the least possible violence against Palestinians. Now the settlers want him gone.”
